Notes and Queries, Vol. V, Number 132, May 8, 1852: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.Various
History
Notes and Queries, Vol. V, Number 132, May 8, 1852: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.
Various
Questions and answers -- Periodicals
_Algernon Sydney_ (Vol. v., pp. 318. 426.).--I can hardly suppose that
MR. H. DIXON can have made any progress in his inquiries as to Algernon
Sydney, without having met with the "authorities" mentioned by your
correspondent C. E. D.; and yet it is certainly strange that, if MR.
DIXON had seen these authorities, he could have called Sydney "an
_illustrious patriot_." It may be therefore as well to state that the
specific evidence which destroys Sydney's claim to the title not merely
of an "_illustrious patriot_," but even of _an honest man_, and shows
him to have been a corrupt traitor of the worst class, is to be found in
the Appendix to Sir John Dalrymple's _Memoirs_, vol. i. pp. 339. 386.
(8vo edit. 1790), where are transcribed the secret despatches of the
French ambassador, Barillon, to Louis XIV., detailing the _bribes_ by
which he engaged Algernon Sydney to that factious and traitorous
opposition which had, for a hundred years prior to Dalrymple's
publication, passed off for _patriotism_. I shall be very curious indeed
to see what light MR. H. DIXON may be able to throw on this curious and
infamous case; of which the best that even Mr. Macaulay can say is, that
Barillon's _louis d'ors_ were "a temptation which conquered the virtue
and the pride of Algernon Sydney."--_History of England_, vol. i. p.
228.
C.
_Cock-and-Bull Stories_ (Vol. v., p. 414.).--It may be doubted whether
Mr. Faber will thank J. R. R. for republishing his absurd blunder. It
must not, however, be allowed to gain a settlement in "N. & Q.," or to
pass for a real explanation, while it is in reality one of the most
unfortunate "cock-and-bull" stories that ever was invented. The truth
is, that Reinerius, a writer of the Middle Ages, lays it to the charge
of the Waldenses that they did not hold the traditions of the Church
and, by way of instance, he specifies that they did _not_ believe (as,
he took for granted, all his orthodox readers _did_) that the cock on
the church steeple was symbolical of a doctor or teacher. Reinerius did
not think of adding a word of explanation about its overlooking the
parish from its elevated position, or of its prescriptive right from the
days of St. Peter to do a pastor's office by reminding men of the duty
of repentance, or of any of the things which writers on symbolism had
said, or might say. He nakedly states, "Item, mysticum sensum in divinis
scripturis refutant: præcipue in dictis et actis ab Ecclesia traditis:
ut quod gallus super campanile significat Doctorem." Mr. Faber, who was
somewhat out of his way in dealing with the thoughts and language of
mediæval writers, catching a sight of this passage, blundered between a
_bell_ and a _belfry_, put _campanum_ for _campanile_, and thus got an
idea of a "cock-on-a-bell," and that this symbol meant a doctor.
Whereupon it occurred to him to set the world right with the wonderful
discovery which J. R. R. has revived for the amusement of your readers.
S. R. MAITLAND.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account